Is quantum mechanics applicable to blackholes?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the applicability of quantum mechanics to black holes, exploring the relationship between quantum physics and the nature of black holes, including their formation, characteristics, and the implications of quantum effects near event horizons. Participants raise questions about the definitions and properties of black holes, the role of quantum mechanics in their behavior, and the theoretical frameworks needed to reconcile these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Theoretical speculation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that black holes, being extremely small and dense, should obey quantum uncertainty principles, questioning whether quantum mechanics is applicable to them.
  • Another participant clarifies that the size of a black hole is defined by its event horizon, which can be quite large, and discusses the nature of singularities, stating that quantum mechanics cannot deal with them.
  • A third participant challenges a previous claim about radiation being detected from black holes, indicating a potential error in that statement.
  • One participant discusses the theoretical existence of supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies, emphasizing the lack of direct evidence and reliance on inferred information.
  • A participant proposes a thought experiment involving a proto-black hole and an electron, questioning whether the uncertainty of the electron's position could make the black hole a quantum object.
  • Another participant mentions the Superposition Principle in relation to singularities and the need for a theory of Quantum Gravity to address these concepts adequately.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints, with some agreeing on the theoretical aspects of black holes and quantum mechanics, while others challenge specific claims and raise questions about the definitions and implications of these concepts. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of black holes, the nature of singularities, and the applicability of quantum mechanics, which are not fully addressed. The need for a comprehensive theory of Quantum Gravity is also highlighted but remains unresolved.

james1234567890
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I have a very little knowledge in physics and I am new to this forum. I have read that quantum physics is a branch of physics that deals with microscopic objects i.e. objects of extremely small size (less than 1 nanometer). I have learned that black holes are extremely small objects with close to point size and infinite density formed by uncontrolled gravitational contraction of a star. Thus by definition, black holes being extremely small objects (point like singularity) formed by uncontrolled gravity should be microscopic and therefore should obey quantum uncertainity just like any other microscopic object would do. Is it a correct conclusion or is there any misconception somewhere in my understanding? Is quantum mechanics applicable to black holes? This doubt occurred to me a few days back. Please clarify me as early as possible. Advanced thanks for your kind response.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The size of a black hole is usually defined as the diameter or radius of the event horizon. You can picture the event horizon as an imaginary sphere around the black hole where anything inside of it can never escape, anything on the borderline can escape only if it is traveling at the speed of light, and anything beyond it can escape at lower velocities. The event horizon can be several kilometers across, depending on the mass of the black hole. There is a disk of particles circling the black hole beyond the event horizon, called an accretion disk, that extends even farther out.

The very center of the black hole, the singularity, is thought to have no size and infinite gravity, and this is difficult to use in equations. Quantum mechanics cannot deal with singularites.

However, there is a lot of stuff going on around black holes that is govered by quantum laws. There are virtual particles, pairs of particles and antiparticles, that are created all the time according to quantum mechanics because they quickly annihilate after they're created. If one of these pairs is created on the border of a black hole's event horizon, one particle could fall into the black hole while the other stays outside. Radiation of this sort has actually been detected from black holes. It was predicted by Stephen Hawking.
 
Quantum gravity wrote:
"Radiation of this sort has actually been detected from black holes. "
But this sentence is wrong.
 
I have a limited understanding of black holes.

But there is a theory that the centre of any galaxy contains a super massive black hole, these holes are formed from immense clumps of mater that got sucked into the centre of the Galaxy during the formation of our galaxy and before the first formations of stars, they have been used to explain how a Galaxy can form and how their motion is caused.

These I can assure you are very very large objects, if the theory is correct the accretion disc itself is probably in the order of light years across. The Black hole proper, is probably also substantial. However this is entirely theoretical and there is no direct evidence of black holes, only inferred information. Every now and again the Black hole gobbles up some more of the galaxy and a bright spot can be seen at the centre of the galaxy? how can we tell it is the centre? Because all the stars around it are moving and it isn't.

AAMOI when Andromeda collides with us in a several billion years, the two super massive black holes will collide forming an even bigger black hole and a much larger galaxy, unfortunately it's likely we'll either get tossed into the void by the collision or tossed into the black hole, assuming of course it is a black hole?

There's a nice little mpeg of the collision here.

http://haydenplanetarium.org/resources/ava/page/index.php?file=G0601andmilwy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had a thought on this sort of thing a while back...

Consider a proto-black hole which is accumulating matter and approaching the threshold of mass concentration required to be a true black hole. It follows that at some point the object will be approached by the last little chunk of mass required to push it 'over the edge'. Suppose that mass is an electron. We know that as objects approach the event horizon, time dilation effects become infinitely strong and time effectively stops on the event horizon.

The electron is a quantum object, however, so its position is uncertain. It can therefore be on either side of the event horizon. The black hole's state, whether it is a proto-black hole or a true black hole, depends on whether or not this electron is inside the event horizon.

Does this make the black hole a quantum object?
 
there has been a lot about bouncing singularities of late- however it seems to me that the Superposition Principle would explicitly state everything beyond the event horizon is in superpostion - but I haven't really seen anything that addresses this because you need a theory of Quantum Gravity first
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
421
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K